plant information

1. Water Treatment
Plant?
Should Winnipeg Build a
located on the border between
Manitoba and Ontario. Water flows
from Shoal Lake to Winnipeg by gravity
through a 160 km aqueduct. The water
is stored in Deacon Reservoir, a large
open reservoir with a capacity of 8,800
million litres. The reservoir helps main-
tain an adequate supply of water dur-
ing peak water usage and also allows
the aqueduct to be shut down for main-
tenance. Two smaller aqueducts downstream of the Deacon Reservoir deliver water to
three smaller reservoirs and pumping stations in different areas of the city. The three
area reservoirs and pumping stations act together to provide water at adequate
pressure to water users throughout the city. Fluoride is added to the water to protect
against tooth decay and chlorine is added as a disinfectant to kill microorganisms.
Deacon Reservoir
Main Aqueduct
MANITOBA
MINNESOTA
ONTARIO
Shoal Lake
(Indian Bay)
Falcon Lake Kenora
Lake of
theWoods
Trans-Canada Highway
Red River
Shoal Lake
Watershed
Boundary
Intake
Winnipeg River
PinawaWinnipeg
Winnipeg gets its drinking water
from Shoal Lake,

2. 1To reduce the risk of a waterborne
disease outbreak caused by
chlorine-resistant microorganisms.
Cryptosporidium (Crypto), a micro-
scopic parasite, can cause gastrointesti-
nal illness. For people in good health,
the illness may come and go for up to a
month. Symptoms can include diarrhea,
abdominal cramps, headaches, loss of
appetite, nausea, and a mild fever.
For people with severely weakened
immune systems, the disease can cause
prolonged distress and can be life-
threatening. Currently, there is no spe-
cific medical treatment for the disease
caused by Cryptosporidium.
2To reduce the levels of
disinfection by-products (DBP’s).
When chlorine is added to the water, it
reacts with organic matter naturally
found in Shoal Lake water to form
chemical compounds called DBP’s.
Studies show an association between
long-term exposure to high levels of
DBP’s and cancer.
3To meet evolving Canadian
Drinking Water Quality Guidelines,
which are becoming more stringent to
protect public health.
Parasites such
as Giardia and
Cryptosporidium
have been found
in virtually all
surface waters in
Canada and the
United States,
including Shoal
Lake.The primary
source for these
organisms is
human and
animal feces.
Chlorine is not
effective in killing
Giardia and
Cryptosporidium.
The proportion of the population with weakened immune sys-
tems is growing in Winnipeg, as it is elsewhere. People with
severely weakened immune systems can include those with
HIV/AIDS, persons with cancer, recipients of organ or bone mar-
row transplants, and persons being treated with immunosup-
pressing drugs.
What is a Water Treatment Plant?
A treatment plant is a large facility that passes raw water through a series of complex
treatment processes that include filtration and the addition of chemicals to increase
the safety of the water by removing microorganisms and organic material.
Microorganisms, specifically bacteria, viruses and parasites, are capable of transmit-
ting diseases to humans. These water treatment processes also improve appearance,
taste and odour.
Why are We Considering a Water Treatment Plant?
There are three important reasons why construction of a water treatment plant is
under consideration:

3. In Canada, guidelines for drinking water are set by the Federal - Provincial
Subcommittee on Drinking Water. The Manitoba government uses these guidelines
as a guide in regulating public water systems.The City of Winnipeg strives to meet the
guidelines for drinking water quality and, in most cases, meets them. However, in
some cases, such as disinfection by-products, the Winnipeg water supply is moder-
ately higher than the allowable guidelines.
There is an ongoing trend in the United States and Canada toward even more strin-
gent drinking water standards and guidelines. It is expected that these guidelines will
address issues related to waterborne organisms, such as Crypto, and chemical con-
taminants, such as disinfection by-products. With our current practice of adding
chlorine and fluoride, Winnipeg would be unable to meet these stricter guidelines.
The Water and Waste Department has a rigorous schedule of sampling and testing.
More than 45 different tests at over 70 different locations are conducted within the
water supply system, including Shoal Lake. Testing is conducted on a daily, weekly,
monthly or quarterly basis to determine compliance with the Canadian Guidelines
and other water quality objectives. Routinely, almost all of these tests are found to
meet the guidelines. In addition, testing is also conducted on a number of parame-
ters over and above current normal requirements, such as disinfection by-products,
Cryptosporidium, Giardia, and algae toxins.
The Department also has monitoring partnerships with
the Province of Manitoba and the Government of Canada.
The Province monitors the water supply system on a quar-
terly basis for parameters of interest in public water supply
systems, such as arsenic, cyanide and pesticides. Test
results show that there are no concerns regarding these
substances. The Government of Canada monitors Shoal
Lake on a monthly and a quarterly basis for a wide variety
of water quality parameters.
Do We Currently Meet
the Canadian Drinking Water Quality Guidelines?
What Steps are Taken to Monitor the Quality
of Winnipeg’s Drinking Water?
Since 1994, Shoal Lake and the Deacon Reservoir have been routinely tested for Crypto. Crypto has not been found in any of the 85 tests
conducted on water samples from the Deacon Reservoir. Water samples taken from Shoal Lake are normally negative for Crypto.Test results
show that only 4 of 80 samples from Shoal Lake have been positive for Crypto.

4. The City of Winnipeg conducted a review of the public health risks associated with
the present water supply system. Experts in public health, along with Canadian and
international specialists in waterborne disease and water supply issues, agreed that
the existing system poses potential health risks. The health risks are waterborne dis-
ease-causing parasites, disinfection by-products, and the potential for natural or
manmade incidents, such as sabotage, chemical spills and accidents. The existing
water supply system has two serious vulnerabilities:
Ⅵ the lack of control over future human activity and industrial development around Shoal
Lake, resulting in a potential for deteriorating water quality and increasing public health
risk; and,
Ⅵ the lack of a water treatment plant to address potential health risks.
After considering all the issues, the experts who conducted the review were of the
opinion that a water treatment facility for Winnipeg’s water supply is justified to pro-
tect public health. The following are two of the key factors supporting their opinion:
1Providing the best possible protection against waterborne parasites is the highest
priority. While the risk of a major waterborne disease outbreak is relatively low for
Winnipeg, experience shows that the consequences could be severe in terms of
human health, economic losses, and loss of public confidence.
2The current process of disinfection causes disinfection by-products to be pro-
duced at undesirable levels. Long-term consumption of water with high levels of
DBP’s increases the risk of serious health effects. With the present system, there is lit-
tle choice but to apply fairly high levels of chlorine in order to achieve the best possi-
ble disinfection. There is a delicate balance between the benefits of adding chlorine
to provide protection against microorganisms, and the risks associated with the
resulting disinfection by-products. While increased disinfection helps to reduce the
health risks due to microorganisms, higher rates of added chlorine produce more
DBP’s, which in turn, can increase health risk. Balancing these health risks is a major
challenge.
A committee comprising representatives of the City of Winnipeg, the
provincial governments of Manitoba and Ontario, the federal gov-
ernment and First Nations are working to develop a sustainable
watershed management plan for Shoal Lake. In 1912, Shoal Lake was
selected as the best source of water forWinnipeg because it was inac-
cessible, relatively isolated, required no treatment and was an enor-
mous reservoir of clear, pure and soft water. However, since then, the
lake has become more accessible, and there are now well-established
summer cottages at Falcon Lake (Falcon Lake is on the Shoal Lake
watershed), as well as on the shores of Shoal Lake itself. There are proposals for the
development of additional cottages, industries and a gold mine. The committee is
working to ensure that development does not negatively affect water quality. Public
consultation will be an important aspect of this process.
What is Being Done to Protect Winnipeg’s Water Source
Is There a Risk to Public Health
with the Present Water Supply System?

5. Individual residents have several options available to them,
such as buying bottled water, or filtering, distilling and boil-
ing tap water. It is not likely that all Winnipeg residents
would use a home water treatment device or buy bottled
water. First, the cost and effort involved can be prohibitive.
Second, there is a high public expectation that the water
utility will take all necessary and reasonable steps to provide
a water supply that is reliable and as safe as possible.
The largest waterborne disease outbreak in recent North American history occurred in April 1993 in Milwaukee,Wisconsin.The outbreak
was identified as cryptosporidiosis (illness caused by Cryptosporidium) and caused approximately 400,000 people to become ill.Over 100
deaths were associated with the outbreak,mostly immunocompromised persons.In addition,the outbreak is estimated to have cost the
community millions of dollars and many lawsuits are pending. Even though Milwaukee had a water treatment plant, unusual operating
circumstances resulted in parasites passing through the facility and contaminating the water. Milwaukee has since upgraded its treat-
ment plant and made many improvements, including better water quality monitoring.
An outbreak of Giardia (“Beaver Fever”) occurred in Dauphin, Manitoba in February
1996. A new water treatment plant began operating in the summer of 1999.
A Northwestern Ontario First Nations Community located on Shoal Lake had a Crypto
outbreak in February 1997.A new water treatment plant for this community of about 370
began operating in the fall of 1998.
In August 1996 an outbreak of Crypto occurred in Kelowna, B.C., reportedly affecting
more than 10,000 people.
Are There Any Alternatives to Ensure
Safe, Quality Drinking Water into the Future?
With respect to the waterborne
parasite Cryptosporidium
(Crypto), consumers should be
aware of the following:
Bottled water
Bottled water is defined as a
food product by Health Canada,
and is not required to undergo
the same monitoring as public
water systems. Some bottled
water on the market might not
meet the Canadian Drinking
Water Quality Guidelines.
Bottled water suppliers typically
do not test for Crypto, and these
parasites can live for weeks in
the water, even if the water is
refrigerated. Labels on bottled
water stating ‘well water’, ‘artesian
well water’, ‘spring water’, or
‘mineral water’, do not guaran-
tee that the water does not
contain Crypto.
Water filters
Some home water filters as certi-
fied by NSF International
(National Sanitation Founda-
tion) can be effective against
Crypto. However, poor mainte-
nance or failure to replace filter
cartridges as recommended by
the manufacturer can cause a
filter to fail. Filters collect dis-
ease-causing organisms from
water, so someone who is not
immune compromised should
change the water filter car-
tridges.

6. If City Council approved the construction of a water treatment plant in 2000, the
plant could be operating in 2006.
The cost to build a water treatment plant is estimated at $204 million. This includes
design, construction and environmental approval costs, and provides for inflation,
since it is anticipated that construction, if approved, would not begin until late 2003
or early 2004.
The Water and Waste Department’s current financial plan provides for cash funding
for 50% of this cost from the Water Treatment Plant Reserve Fund, and for financing
the remaining 50% through long-term debt.
Established in 1993, the Water Treatment Plant Reserve Fund is financed through
water rates. In 1999, 16.5 cents of every dollar customers pay for water service goes
into theWater Treatment Plant Reserve Fund. By the end of 1999, the Department will
have accumulated savings of approximately $25 million in this reserve fund.
The annual cost to operate the water treatment plant is estimated at $12 million. This
includes operating and maintenance costs and provides for inflation, since it is
anticipated that the water treatment plant would not begin operating until 2006.
How Long Would it Take to Build a Water Treatment Plant?
How Much Would it Cost to Build a Water Treatment Plant?
What Would it Cost to Operate a Water Treatment Plant?
Conceptual design of a water treatment plant

7. Since 1992, the Department has been following a Council-approved 10-year financial
plan designed to finance the cost of two large-scale improvements, the Aqueduct
Rehabilitation Program and the proposed water treatment plant. We are more than
halfway through the 10-year program to rehabilitate the Shoal Lake aqueduct. If a
water treatment plant were approved, it would be necessary to increase the com-
bined water and sewer rate by less than 5% of the 1999 rate. For residential customers,
the 1999 combined rate is $5.34 per 100 cubic feet of consumption. For a typical
residential customer (a family of four), the increase would be less than $6.20 on
a quarterly bill of $124.00.
If Council decides not to proceed with the plant, a decrease in the combined water
and sewer rate of approximately 18% could be considered by City Council for imple-
mentation over the next four to six years. This drop in the cost of water and sewer
services would result from both a decision not to build a water treatment plant, and
completion of the Aqueduct Program in 2003. This decrease also assumes no other
major improvements in Winnipeg’s water and sewer system would be required.
Would We Have to Pay More for Water if a Water Treatment Plant is Built?
Do Other Canadian Cities Have Water Treatment Plants?
Pictured here is the pilot water treatment plant built at Deacon
Reservoir by City of Winnipeg staff in early 1996. Pilot testing was
conducted over a 16-month period to identify the best available
treatment technology for the specific characteristics of Winnipeg’s
water.Testing was conducted over four different seasons to assure
that treatment would be effective for the changing seasonal water
quality characteristics.
Most cities with surface water supplies (like Shoal Lake) have water treatment plants.
Vancouver,Victoria, Kamloops and Kelowna are examples of major Canadian cities that
do not have a water treatment plant. Vancouver is currently in the design stage of a
water treatment plant and Kelowna is considering building a water treatment plant. In
Kamloops, the Ministry of Health issued an order to have water treatment in place by
2003, because Cryptosporidium and Giardia have been detected in the water system. In
Manitoba, Winnipeg is the only large community without a water treatment plant.
Many cities with existing water treatment plants are planning to upgrade their sys-
tems to provide higher and more reliable water quality. Calgary has started the design
and construction of a four-phase upgrade
to their water treatment plant that will
result in improved protection from
Cryptosporidium and Giardia, as well as
reduce disinfection by-products to meet
future limits, which are expected to be
more stringent. Edmonton is carrying out
a study to upgrade both its water treat-
ment plants.

8. The Executive Policy Committee (EPC) of City Council is holding two special meet-
ings in October 1999 to receive public opinion on the issue of water treatment. EPC
will then provide a recommendation to Council on whether or not to proceed with
the construction of a water treatment plant. A decision by City Council is required at
this point because of the preparation time necessary for financing and planning.
The City of Winnipeg has successfully undertaken the following two initiatives to
ensure that Winnipeg has an adequate supply of water into the foreseeable future
without building another aqueduct or developing another water source in addition to
Shoal Lake:
Aqueduct Rehabilitation
In the early 1990’s, engineering studies showed that the aqueduct was in need of
major repairs. A $54 million rehabilitation program began in 1993 and will be com-
plete in 2003. The restoration program is expected to extend the useful life of the
aqueduct for at least another 50 years.
Water Conservation
The City implemented a Water Conservation Program in 1992 to promote more effi-
cient use of water, including the use of water-efficient plumbing fixtures. The com-
munity supports this program, and residential, commercial and industrial water use
has reduced in recent years. As a result, the water demand for Winnipeg is expected
to be stable for the next 20 years, even with a projected growth in population.
The Water and Waste Department recently
completed a four-year program studying
water treatment technologies; this study
included a conceptual design for a water
treatment plant. The proposed water treat-
ment plant is sized to meet current and
foreseeable water demands and standards.
How Will the Decision Be Made
About Whether or Not to Build a Water Treatment Plant?
Are There Any Other Major Expenses on the Horizon
for Our Water Supply System?
City of Winnipeg
Water and Waste Department
Aqueduct Rehabilitation
Reliable, safe water is vital for the social and economic well being of our community!